no title

Editorial

Sunshine grew brighter

Ohio’s governments do better in providing access to records

About our Editorials

Dispatch editorials express the view of the
Dispatch editorial board, which is made up of the publisher, the president of
The Dispatch, the editor and the editorial-writing staff. As is the traditional newspaper
practice, the editorials are unsigned and intended to be seen as the voice of the newspaper.
Comments and questions should be directed to the
editorial page editor.

Also in Opinion

Subscribe to The Dispatch

Already a subscriber?
Enroll in EZPay and get a free gift!
Enroll now.

Saturday June 14, 2014 4:35 AM

Ohioans rely on easy access to public records to keep tabs on their government — as in, did the
city council’s meeting minutes show it will fight a liquor-license renewal for a crime-ridden
corner carryout?

And to keep government honest and defend themselves from abuses of power, such as when people
are released from prison after public records reveal misconduct by the government officials who
helped convict them.

More often, however, people seek public records to take care of everyday business: getting a
birth certificate for a passport, checking a restaurant’s health-department inspection or scouring
police reports for neighborhood crime.

So it is good news that local governments are obeying open-records law at a much higher rate
than they did a decade ago, as reported by
The Dispatch on Wednesday.

Public employees asked to provide common records did so 9 out of 10 times, according to a new
survey by the Ohio Coalition for Open Government of the Ohio Newspaper Association. The group last
canvassed the state in 2004, when just 7 out of 10 requests were fulfilled in substantial
compliance with the law..

A 70 percent response rate was unacceptable. And though 90 percent is much better, it’s not
perfect. Public employees should follow the state law 100 percent of the time.

The 10 percent noncompliance rate is particularly notable because the requests were for
documents and information that should be at hand, such as meeting minutes, birth records, mayors’
expense reports and superintendents’ pay.

The television, radio and newspaper reporters who served as auditors for the April survey didn’t
reveal their press credentials to make sure they were receiving the same treatment as any other
member of the public.

A weakness of Ohio’s open-records law is its lack of strong sanctions against government
entities that illegally withhold public records. Penalties for noncompliance are capped at $1,000,
and those who sue for access to records can only recoup $10,000 in attorney fees — insufficient for
a long fight. In recent years, Ohio’s legislature and courts also have chipped away at access to
public records.

Public servants should remember that they are the custodians, not the owners, of government
records. Their job is to make them available.

In this, the coalition’s survey is invaluable.

But others still learn the law. ONA auditors’ requests were sometimes followed by impermissible
questions, such as a demand to know the person’s name or to submit requests in writing, neither
required by the law.

The audit also exposed “digital holes”: Email addresses on websites didn’t work, requests landed
in junk-mail folders and some websites failed to list a contact through which to obtain public
records, leaving users to guess.

At minimum, said Dennis Hetzel, ONA’s executive director, even the smallest county should have a
general email account and check it throughout the day.

The Internet should make it easier for local governments to post public records to better serve
their taxpayers and to save staff time filling public-records requests.

With 1 in 10 records requests denied, Ohio still has a problem. Ohioans should arm themselves
with knowledge of the law and hold their employees accountable.

To see the state’s records laws and explanations of them, go to
www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/sunshine.